Representatives from both Twitter and Facebook denied engaging in “shadowbanning” in response to a question from Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) t0day, although Twitter’s representative went on to describe practices that mirrors the covert censorship almost exactly.
“Does Twitter or Facebook engage in shadowbans?” asked Sen. Cruz, during today’s Senate judiciary committee hearing on technological censorship.
Turning to Twitter’s representative, Sen. Cruz said “you testified before, or you acknowledged that Twitter will downgrade a comment to make it less visible. Does Twitter notify a person if their comment has been downgraded?”
“If we have signals indicating that a person is being a spammy, meaning they are using multiple accounts to do the same, if they are doing automated activity but we’re not 100 percent sure that they are breaking our rules, if they’re abusive then what we will do is make it harder for that content to be found in a couple of different places – one is in search results, and the other is in conversations — the replies.” . . .
“At no point, sir, is a person’s followers unable to find what that person has tweeted,” said the Twitter spokesman. (Read more from “Twitter and Facebook Deny ‘Shadowbanning’ in Senate Hearing” HERE)
Fox News guest and PJ Media contributor Denise McAllister is reportedly receiving death and rape threats. Her crime? Sending out a pro-life tweet. . .
“The root of abortion hysteria is women’s unhinged desire for irresponsible sex. Sex is their god. Abortion is their sacrament. It’s abhorrent as women have flung themselves from the heights of being the world’s civilized force to the muck and mire of dehumanizing depravity.”
The Christian blogger reports subsequently being attacked across multiple social media platforms, and her private email inbox. On September 10, she tweeted “Due to threats against my life, my family is asking that I stay off social media until the situation is resolved. I don’t want to, but I need to respect their wishes at this time. I hope to return soon. Keep up the good fight, my friends.”
“I am facing legit death & rape threats because I have dared to call out women who are hysterical about abortion and to challenge them to be responsible and not to elevate sex to the point that they’re willing to kill human life to avoid their responsibilities,” McAllister said. “How sick is that?” . . .
Back in January, Elizabeth Johnston, otherwise known as Activist Mommy, was threatened on Facebook. Johnston, a popular Christian blogger and homeschooling mother, is known for her viral rants. But then she started receiving death threats. (Read more from “Christian Blogger Gets Death Threats Over Pro-Life Tweet” HERE)
Colleges now encourage students to become a self-governing body of secret police in the vein of Robespierre, providing places where they can report each other for saying something “offensive” on social media.
According to Reason, as many as 100 campuses have enacted “bias reporting” systems where students can report each other for so-called “bias incidents” — the sin of uttering something offensive.
The latest college to join in on this culturally Marxist trend is the Massachusetts-based Williams College, which, according to the campus website, has deemed “name-calling and stereotyping” examples of such bias. The criteria for a “bias incident” might range from outright racist comments to your standard jokes about racial stereotypes . . .
The rules fail to make any distinction between actually mocking somebody for their disability and “making comments on social media” about another person’s religious or political beliefs. It’s not clear how the rules are to be enforced, or whether uncomfortable subjects like Islamic terrorism must now be reported to the campus commissars.
The College Fix notes that Williams correctly distinguishes a “bias incident” from a hate crime. However, the reporting system is the same for both “bias” and “hate” issues; anybody who feels victimized by such an incident is encouraged to report it to either the Dean of the College, the Office of Strategic Planning and Diversity, counseling services, or even campus security. (Read more from “College Students Can Report Each Other for Social Media Comments on Politics and Religion” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Student_in_Class_3618969705-1.jpg11731800Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2018-01-17 17:04:202018-01-17 17:04:20College Students Can Report Each Other for Social Media Comments on Politics and Religion
Ever pay attention to trends in the media? Some stories and narratives rise and fall in cycles, along with your awareness of them. It’s kind of like a shell game, where the street hustler directs your attention to one shell as a distraction while he shuffles aside the nut with the goods in it. A ‘now you see it, now you don’t,’ kind of thing.
When you see the same story arise frequently in the mainstream media, you can bet that it’s something you’re supposed to be looking at.
You see, the major corporate media operates from talking points and top-down directives. A mere 6 corporations owns some 90% of all the major media outlets, and as corporations do, they rule by memos from up high.
The Tonight Show host Conan O’Brien knows this, and he rips on the media for the insane homogenization of local news. He does this bit where his team edits together actual footage of local newscasters from around the country saying the exact same thing, word for word, but, each anchor-person personalizes it with their own inflection, pausing, intonation and so on. It’s hilarious, but at the same time disturbing because it shockingly demonstrates how ideas are forced into the mainstream of today’s corporate culture.
Have a look. This always cracks me up. Not in a ‘ha ha’ sort of way, though, more like in a ‘ha ha, aren’t we gullible,’ kind of way. Big difference.
The point is, when you see a story being played over and again on various news outlets, you have good reason to believe that the information isn’t coming to you organically. It’s not something you really need to know or something that is genuinely relevant to day-to-day life in your community. It’s the execution of an agenda. The information is being deliberately disseminated to manufacture awareness and recalibrate the standard for normal. It’s something the corporate media wants you to focus on. Like in the shell game.
When you understand this fundamental of corporate media, the landscape of information today looks totally different. You’re able to see narratives unfold and evolve, and able to recognize when your attention is deliberately being drawn towards an issue. Or away from an issue.
Here are a few examples from the present that when taken as everyday happenstance may seem benign, but have serious implications for the future of society and for the human race at large. The fact that these issues are being presented with noticeable frequency these days is a red flag that there is some larger agenda in the works. The norms, values and standards in our culture are being tweaked, or twerked, and attacked by the repetition of such information.
Vaccines – This is perhaps one of the most common issues thrust on the public in order to fabricate widespread public support for a questionable and very profitable practice. The one-sidedness of the debate on this sensitive issued has successfully created a society where people now openly demand forced medical procedures on others to alleviate a perceived fear.
Gender Neutrality – This is the idea that a person’s biological gender is somehow fluid against their opinion of themselves. There is an apparent effort to make us believe that those with confusion over their gender are horribly oppressed and in danger, and that they need to be protected with censorship and speech laws. The aim here is to promote the virtues of censorship, and to develop a generation of people who don’t value procreation and the advancement of the human race, but rather shallow social issues and a perceived sense of justice.
Sex Robots – Robot sex toys are increasingly being put in front of the public and lauded as the future of companionship. News stories on the latest advancements in robot sex dolls are ubiquitous these days. We are being told they make great life partners and that they sufficiently synthesize the experience of being with a real woman (or man). The end game here is to further disconnect people from each other, and perhaps also to assist in a broader depopulation agenda by persuading us that sex with plastic and electronics is as good as or better than the real thing. Look for birth rates to decline further as these creepy sex toys become more popular.
Microchipping – Some call this the ‘mark of the beast,’ but the idea of microchipping people for their supposed convenience is being pushed out onto all the major media channels as a great way to take part in our technological future. Issues of privacy, tyranny, and the abuse of power are hardly examined. Feature stories on acquiescent corporate employees who willingly take the chip make it seem as though chipping is fashionable.
These are just a few examples, but the technique in play here is a fundamental method of social engineering via media.
Among the regular flow of info, certain topics or subjects are thrust into public consciousness with regularity. The issues are never quite framed as critically important, but rather positioned as matter-of-fact, sign-of-the-times. Opposing arguments or viewpoints are never fully explored. Frame it in such a way that it seems exciting and cutting edge. Normalize it by mixing it in with everyday things, and repeating it. Make it seem like the future is here now, and that there is a bandwagon you need to get in on order to be part of the gang.
This method works. It’s called conditioning. An idea as reprehensible as exchanging human-on-human love for sex with elaborate robots would have been shocking and totally unacceptable a few generations ago. But, slowly raise awareness of the wonders of this new technology over time, and people become curious rather than repulsed. It becomes normalized.
There really is nothing you can do about living in such a changing world, except opt-out of the insanity, stupidity and self-destructive tendencies being framed as wholesome cultural advances. To make good decisions in this regard, it’s imperative to be able to process information in a way that acknowledges the true nature of corporate/government propaganda.
Social engineering is real. It’s happening all around you. Are you paying attention? (For more from the author of “Social Engineering via Corporate Media Fraud: How to Normalize the Absurd” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/working-on-a-laptop-14933938350om.jpg12801920Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-08-14 22:14:462017-08-14 22:14:46Social Engineering via Corporate Media Fraud: How to Normalize the Absurd
Bad news, extremists. Facebook and YouTube have announced that they are updating their software to automatically remove content deemed to be “extreme,” by which we can only assume they mean videos associated with terrorist groups or other violent individuals. The goal is to make the spread of hate and violence more difficult via these popular internet channels, which is undoubtedly a laudable goal. Yet I can’t help wondering whether this policy is wise, even in the unlikely event that it will be successful.
Until now, these sites have relied on users reporting objectionable content, in order to ensure that inappropriate content is not allowed to remain publicly available. Apparently, not enough users were outraged about ISIS-related content to complain. At least, that would be the implication. And while’ it’s easy to see efficiency advances in automating this process, it also raises some new questions.
The biggest one for me is, how do these algorithms decide what counts as “extremist” and what doesn’t? By removing the element of human judgment from the equation, it’s hard to see how a piece of software can know enough to distinguish a video that should be taken down from one that is making a satirical or political point. Machines are notoriously bad at detecting sarcasm and irony, for example.
Of course, the specifics of the algorithms to be used are being kept a closely-guarded secret, for the simple reason that extremist groups who know what they’re looking for can disguise their videos to avoid the filter. That’s a reasonable explanation, but it doesn’t answer the concerns about pulling down perfectly legitimate content by mistake. And even if the program is perfect and does only identify what its masters consider “extremist,” what’s to stop them from using that power to designate conservative, tea party or libertarian organizations as among those too hot for TV?
We know that Facebook has a bad history with political bias. We also know that the FBI considers anti-government sentiment to be extremist, by which measure I must certainly be on a list somewhere. To what extent is this policy change going to protect people, and to what extent will it be used to suppress unpopular but legitimate opinions? That’s my worry.
Now of course, Facebook and YouTube are both private companies, meaning they have the right to remove any content they don’t like, for any reason whatsoever. It’s their site and they get to choose what goes on it. Fair enough. But The Hill describes these companies as responding to “pressure from President Obama and European leaders.” What sort of pressure are they reacting to, I wonder. When government gets involved, there is usually a pretty strong distinction between a company policy freely chosen for benefit of the users and shareholders, and one chosen because of threats, whether explicit or implied, of government retaliation.
The internet has always been a haven of free speech, where anything goes and nothing is over the line. This is a double edged sword. In order to allow meaningful political dissent, you also have to allow hateful, indefensible things said by potentially violent people. I think the benefits of such a system outweigh the drawbacks by rather a large margin. But if the web’s most powerful companies start engaging in automatic, unthinking censorship of speech they find offensive, we may be in danger of losing the greatest forum for free thinking and new ideas in the history of mankind. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that. (For more from the author of “Could Facebook and YouTube’s New Anti-Terror Software Censor Conservatives?” please click HERE)
Curt Schilling, a former All-Star pitcher and one of the highest-profile baseball analysts on ESPN, was fired from the network Wednesday, a day after he drew intense criticism for promoting ‘offensive’ commentary on social media.
Schilling, who had worked for the network since 2010 and most recently offered analysis on “Monday Night Baseball,” was dismissed after sharing a Facebook post this week that appeared to respond to the North Carolina law that bars transgender people from using bathrooms and locker rooms that do not correspond with their birth genders.
The post showed an overweight man wearing a wig and women’s clothing with parts of the T-shirt cut out to expose his breasts. It says: “LET HIM IN! to the restroom with your daughter or else you’re a narrow-minded, judgmental, unloving racist bigot who needs to die.”
To that, Schilling added: “A man is a man no matter what they call themselves. I don’t care what they are, who they sleep with, men’s room was designed for the penis, women’s not so much. Now you need laws telling us differently? Pathetic.” (Read more from “Curt Schilling, ESPN Analyst, Is Fired Over ‘Offensive’ Social Media Post” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Curt_Schilling_Pitch.jpg520700Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-04-21 03:31:312016-04-21 03:31:31Curt Schilling, ESPN Analyst, Is Fired Over ‘Offensive’ Social Media Post
Rule-breaking may be just as irresistible to teenagers today as it was in their parents’ day, but a new study of secret social media hashtags like #selfharmmm suggests that new technology is helping kids share dangerous behaviors more easily than ever before.
When it comes to what’s known as non-suicidal self-injury – cutting, burning and scratching done with damage rather than death in mind – teens can be quite crafty at deploying hashtags that mask their activities, evade content safeguards and advisory warnings, and make it much harder for parents to monitor their virtual lives.
“The online communities that develop around these hashtags can draw in adolescents and provide them a strong sense of belonging and support that is centered on these unhealthy behaviors,” said lead study author Dr. Megan Moreno, a specialist in adolescent medicine at the University of Washington and Seattle Children’s Research Institute . . .
Moreno and colleagues used the search term #selfharmmm to identify public posts on the social media platform Instagram, a photo-sharing service popular with teens, that related to destructive habits like cutting and burning.
Then, they used the search results to identify a list of ambiguous hashtags such as #blithe, #MySecretFamily and #SecretSociety123 that were tied to the same dangerous behaviors. (Read more from “Secret Hashtags Help Teens Share Dangerous Habits” HERE)
Family members could be kept alive forever virtually so that living relatives could interact with their avatars, an academic has suggested.
Simon McKeown, a Reader in Animation and Post Production at Teesside University, claims that within 50 years computers will be advanced enough that they can create ‘synthetic digital life’ based upon people’s past movements, preferences and history on social media.
The avatars would be created using a process called ‘photogrammetry’ which can accurately reconstruct a virtual 3D shape of a human being from existing photographs and video. Computer voice synthesis, will take account local and regional accents to deliver a more accurate representation of what they sounded like.
The digital lifeform would also be linked up to social networks and large databases so they would be kept ‘up to date’ with their relative’s activities and could communicate with them about their day.
Mr McKeown has dubbed the idea ‘Preserved Memories’ and claims that people would be able to construct a reality to avoid ever having to say goodbye to loved ones. (Read more from “Family Members Could Be Kept Alive Forever Using Social Media History” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-10-27 23:51:282016-04-11 10:56:52Family Members Could Be Kept Alive Forever Using Social Media History
When Elton Simpson drove from Phoenix to Garland, Texas, last month to gun down attendees at a Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest, he also fired off a series of tweets.
Those tweets were indicative of the broad use that the Islamic State and people acting in its name are making of social media, according to three top intelligence officials who testified Wednesday before the House Committee on Homeland Security.
“I have been doing this for 45 years,” said Francis Taylor, the undersecretary of intelligence and analysis for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. “I’ve never seen a terrorist organization with a kind of public relations savvy as ISIL.” ISIL is the government’s preferred acronym for the Islamic State, which is also known as ISIS.
Simpson died before he could attack the cartoon contest, felled by a police officer’s bullet. But the Islamic State’s public relations savvy has drawn 180 Americans to join the group, Taylor said in his prepared remarks. It’s also led to a number of lone wolf attacks throughout the world, including what police called a failed plot by Usaama Rahim to behead two law enforcement officers in Boston on Tuesday.
“ISIL has constructed a narrative that is appealing to people from many different walks of life,” said Michael Steinbach, the assistant director in the Counterterrorism Division of the FBI. “There is no set profile for the consumer of this propaganda.” (Read more from “Islamic State’s Command of Social Media Called Unprecedented” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-04 03:30:352016-04-11 11:00:25Islamic State’s Command of Social Media Called Unprecedented
Monday, Madge shared and then deleted an image of late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on Instagram, captioned with a famous 1989 quote from the leader, who passed away in 2013: “If you set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing.”
The “Material Girl” then added her own comment, referencing her new album Rebel Heart, which read: “Thank you Margaret Thatcher,” with the tags #unapologetic, #rebelheart and a love heart . . .
Photo Credit: Twitter
Apparently unbeknownst to Madonna, Thatcher is not viewed as a fan of homosexual culture, and the post did not go over well with her large gay fan following.
Due to Section 28 legislation, which essentially banned schools from “promoting homosexuality” under Thatcher’s watch in 1988 as a means to combat the AIDS virus, the Iron Lady is still viewed as a figure of oppression in the country by many gays.
Section 28 was abolished in 2003, but is still a frequent topic of debate, something the singer had apparently not picked up on while living in the U.K., or while she was acquiring a British accent more than a decade ago. (Read more from “See the Social Media Post Madonna Had to Delete After Gay Outrage” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-04-22 03:54:592015-04-22 03:54:59See the Social Media Post Madonna Had to Delete After Gay Outrage
Curt Schilling, a former All-Star pitcher and one of the highest-profile baseball analysts on ESPN, was fired from the network Wednesday, a day after he drew intense criticism for promoting ‘offensive’ commentary on social media.
